“On another occasion, during the same period, the case of
Tennessee was discussed. I expressed the hope most earnestly
that the President would use his influence directly for the
establishment of impartial suffrage in that State,--saying,
that, in this way, Tennessee would be put at the head of the
returning column, and be made an example,--in one word, that
all the other States would be obliged to dress on Tennessee.
The President replied, that, if he were at Nashville, he would
see that this was accomplished. I could not help rejoining
promptly, that he need not be at Nashville, for at Washington
his hand was on the long end of the lever, with which he
could easily move all Tennessee,--referring, of course, to
the powerful, but legitimate, influence which the President
might exercise in his own State by the expression of his
desires.”[250]
Then, again, as I was about to leave on my return home to
Massachusetts, in an interview with him I ventured to express my
desires and aspirations as follows: this was in May, 1865:--
“After remarking that the Rebel region was still in military
occupation, and that it was the plain duty of the President
to use his temporary power for the establishment of correct
principles, I proceeded to say: ‘First, see to it that no
newspaper is allowed which is not thoroughly loyal and does not
speak well of the National Government and of Equal Rights’; and
here I reminded him of the saying of the Duke of Wellington,
that in a place under martial law an unlicensed press was as
impossible as on the deck of a ship of war. ‘Secondly, let the
officers that you send as military governors or otherwise be
known for their devotion to Equal Rights, so that their names
alone will be a proclamation, while their simple presence will
help educate the people’; and here I mentioned Major-General
Carl Schurz, who still held his commission in the Army, as such
a person. ‘Thirdly, encourage the population to resume the
profitable labors of agriculture, commerce, and manufactures,
without delay,--but for the present to avoid politics.
Fourthly, keep the whole Rebel region under these good
influences, and at the proper moment hand over the subject of
Reconstruction, with the great question of Equal Rights, to the
judgment of Congress, where it belongs.’ All this the President
received at the time with perfect kindness; and I mention this
with the more readiness because I remember to have seen in the
papers a very different statement.”[251]
Before I left Washington, and in the midst of my interviews with the
President, I was honored by a communication from colored citizens
of North Carolina, asking my counsel with regard to their rights,
especially the right to vote. I will not read their letter,--it was
published in the papers of the time, and much commented upon,--but I
will read my reply.[252]
“WASHINGTON, May 13, 1865.
“GENTLEMEN,--I am glad that the colored citizens of North
Carolina are ready to take part in the organization of
Government. It is unquestionably their right and duty.
“I see little chance of peace or tranquillity in any Rebel
State, unless the rights of all are recognized, without
distinction of color. On this foundation we must build.
“The article on Reconstruction to which you call my attention
proceeds on the idea, born of Slavery, that persons with a
white skin are the only ‘citizens.’ This is a mistake.
“As you do me the honor to ask me the proper stand for you to
make, I have no hesitation in replying that you must insist on
all the rights and privileges of a citizen. They belong to you;
they are yours; and whoever undertakes to rob you of them is a
usurper and impostor.
“Of course you will take part in any primary meetings for
political organization open to citizens generally, and will not
miss any opportunity to show your loyalty and fidelity.
“Accept my best wishes, and believe me, Gentlemen, faithfully
yours,
“CHARLES SUMNER.”
Such was my earnestness in this work, that, when invited by the
municipality of Boston, where I was born and have always lived, to
address my fellow-citizens in commemoration of the late President, I
deemed it my duty to dedicate the day mainly to a vindication of Equal
Rights as represented by him. I hold in my hand the address on that
occasion, from which I will read one passage. This was on the 1st of
June, 1865.
“The argument for Colored Suffrage is overwhelming. It springs
from the necessity of the case, as well as from the Rights of
Man. This suffrage is needed for the security of the colored
people, for the stability of the local government, and for
the strength of the Union. Without it there is nothing but
insecurity for the colored people, instability for the local
government, and weakness for the Union, involving of course the
national credit.”[253]
This was followed by a letter, dated Boston, July 8, 1865, addressed to
the colored people of Savannah, who had done me the honor of forwarding
to me a petition asking for the right to vote, with the request that I
would present it to the President. After saying, that, had I been at
Washington, I should have had great pleasure in presenting the petition
personally, but that I was obliged to content myself with another
method, I proceeded in this way:--
“Allow me to add, that you must not be impatient. You
have borne the heavier burdens of Slavery; and as these
are now removed, believe the others surely will be also.
This enfranchised Republic, setting an example to mankind,
cannot continue to sanction an odious oligarchy whose single
distinctive element is color. I have no doubt that you will be
admitted to the privileges of citizens.
“It is impossible to suppose that Congress will sanction
governments in the Rebel States which are not founded on
‘the consent of the governed.’ This is the corner-stone of
republican institutions. Of course, by the ‘governed’ is meant
all the loyal citizens, without distinction of color. Anything
else is mockery.
“Never neglect your work; but, meanwhile, prepare yourselves
for the privileges of citizens. They are yours of right,
and I do not doubt that they will be yours soon in reality.
The prejudice of Caste and a false interpretation of the
Constitution cannot prevail against justice and common
sense, both of which are on your side,--and I may add, the
Constitution also, which, when properly interpreted, is clearly
on your side.
“Accept my best wishes, and believe me, fellow-citizens,
faithfully yours,
“CHARLES SUMNER.”[254]
This was followed by an elaborate speech before the Republican State
Convention at Worcester, September 14, 1865, entitled “The National
Security and the National Faith: Guaranties for the National Freedman
and the National Creditor,”--where I insisted that national peace and
tranquillity could be had only from _impartial suffrage_; and I believe
that it was on this occasion that this phrase, which has since become
a formula of politics, was first publicly employed. My language was as
follows:--
“As the national peace and tranquillity depend essentially upon
the overthrow of monopoly and tyranny, here is another occasion
for special guaranty against the whole pretension of color.
_No Rebel State can be readmitted with this controversy still
raging and ready to break forth._”
Mark the words, if you please.
“So long as it continues, the land will be barren, agriculture
and business of all kinds will be uncertain, and the country
will be handed over to a fearful struggle, with the terrors
of San Domingo to darken the prospect. In shutting out the
freedman from his equal rights at the ballot-box, you open the
doors of discontent and insurrection. Cavaignac, the patriotic
President of the French Republic, met the present case,
when, speaking for France, he said: ‘I do not believe repose
possible, either in the present or the future, except so far
as you found your political condition on universal suffrage,
loyally, sincerely, completely accepted and observed.’”[255]
I then proceeded,--not adopting the term “universal suffrage,” employed
by the eminent Frenchman,--as follows:--
“It is _impartial suffrage_ that I claim, without distinction
of color, so that there shall be one equal rule for all
men. And this, too, must be placed under the safeguard of
Constitutional Law.”[256]
I followed up this effort by a communication to that powerful and
extensively circulated paper, the New York “Independent,” under date of
Boston, October 29, 1865, where I expressed myself as follows:--
“For the sake of the whole country, which suffers from weakness
in any part,--for the sake of the States lately distracted by
war, which above all things need security and repose,--for the
sake of agriculture, which is neglected there,--for the sake
of commerce, which has fled,--for the sake of the national
creditor, whose generous trust is exposed to repudiation,--and,
finally, for the sake of reconciliation, which can be complete
only when justice prevails, we must insist upon Equal Rights as
the condition of the new order of things.”
Mark, if you please, Sir, “as the condition of the new order of
things,”--or, as I called it on other occasions, the corner-stone of
Reconstruction.
“So long as this question remains unsettled, there can be no
true peace. Therefore I would say to the merchant who wishes
to open trade with this region, to the capitalist who would
send his money there, to the emigrant who seeks to find a
home there, Begin by assuring justice to all men. This is
the one essential condition of prosperity, of credit, and of
tranquillity. Without this, mercantile houses, banks, and
emigration societies having anything to do with this region
must all fail, or at least suffer in business and resources. To
Congress we must look as guardian, under the Constitution, of
the national safety.”[257]
Meanwhile the President adopted a policy of reaction. I was at home
in Massachusetts, and from Boston, under date of November 12, 1865, I
addressed him a telegraphic dispatch, as follows:--
“TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, WASHINGTON.
“As a faithful friend and supporter of your administration,
I most respectfully petition you to suspend for the present
your policy towards the Rebel States. I should not present
this prayer, if I were not painfully convinced that thus
far it has failed to obtain any reasonable guaranties for
that security in the future which is essential to peace and
reconciliation. To my mind, it abandons the freedmen to the
control of their ancient masters, and leaves the national debt
exposed to repudiation by returning Rebels. The Declaration of
Independence asserts the equality of all men, and that rightful
government can be founded only on the consent of the governed.
I see small chance of peace, unless these great principles are
practically established. Without this the house will continue
divided against itself.
“CHARLES SUMNER,
“_Senator of the United States_.”[258]
Not content with these efforts, in an article more literary than
political in its character, which found a place in the “Atlantic
Monthly” for December, 1865, entitled, “Clemency and Common Sense: a
Curiosity of Literature, with a Moral,” I again returned to this same
question. I will quote only a brief passage.
“Again, we are told gravely that the national power which
decreed Emancipation cannot maintain it by assuring universal
enfranchisement, because an imperial government must be
discountenanced,--as if the whole suggestion of ‘Imperialism’
or ‘Centralism’ were not out of place, until the national
security is established, and our debts, whether to the national
freedman or the national creditor, are placed where they
cannot be repudiated. A phantom is created, and, to avoid this
phantom, we drive towards concession and compromise, as from
Charybdis to Scylla.”[259]
The session of Congress opened December 4, 1865, and you will find that
on the first day I introduced two distinct measures of Reconstruction,
with Equality before the Law as their corner-stone. The first was a
bill in the following terms:--
“A Bill in part execution of the guaranty of a republican form
of government in the Constitution of the United States.
“Whereas it is declared in the Constitution that the United
States shall guaranty to every State in this Union a republican
form of government; and whereas certain States have allowed
their governments to be subverted by rebellion, so that the
duty is now cast upon Congress of executing this guaranty: Now,
therefore,
“_Be it enacted, &c._, That in all States lately declared to
be in rebellion there shall be no oligarchy invested with
peculiar privileges and powers, and there shall be no denial
of rights, civil or political, on account of race or color;
but all persons shall be equal before the law, whether in the
court-room or at the ballot-box. And this statute, made in
pursuance of the Constitution, shall be the supreme law of the
land, anything in the Constitution or laws of any such State to
the contrary notwithstanding.”[260]
The second was “A Bill to enforce the guaranty of a republican form
of government in certain States whose governments have been usurped
or overthrown.”[261] Read this bill, if you please, Sir. I challenge
criticism of it at this date, in the light of all our present
experience. It is in twelve sections, and you will find in it the very
proposition which is now in question,--being the requirement of Equal
Rights for All in the reconstruction of the Rebel States.
“SEC. 5. _And be it further enacted_, That the delegates”--
that is, the delegates to the Convention for the reëstablishment of a
State government--
“shall be elected by _the loyal male citizens_ of the United
States, of the age of twenty-one years, and resident at the
time in the county, parish, or district in which they shall
offer to vote, and enrolled as aforesaid, or absent in the
military service of the United States.”[262]